Recall Paul and Barnabas, great friends and missionary partners, and their major disagreement which caused them to part ways rather than traveling together for the rest of their lives?

'How sad', might be the first reaction.  Yet God used their separate efforts for even greater good than if they had been joined together.  'How wonderfully God worked it out for good,' might be a better summary.

And so it may turn out for many of us as well.  Especially in these 'last days'.

 

--

 

Also, I heard this quote today from a visiting scientist:

"I'm from Scotland.  I believe that it's actually important to know what's going on.  If I was from England, the only important thing would be knowing who's in charge, and making sure I'm friends with him."

He he he.

There's something to be said for both approaches...   Especially and fundamentally, in our relationship with God the Creator, we can stop worrying and leave the 'outcomes' to Him, as our Father in heaven.  Ponder this statement that Jesus made in John 18:11-

Simon Peter then, having a sword, drew it and struck the high priest's slave, and cut off his right ear; and the slave's name was Malchus.  So Jesus said to Peter, "Put the sword into the sheath; the cup which the Father has given Me, shall I not drink it?"

One might think that if ever Jesus had a reason to balk and refuse to obey His Father, this would be the time...  He knew exactly what torment the Father was guiding Him toward, unlike his disciples who were in denial and refused to listen to His predictions.   But so deep was His trust, that Jesus figured whatever the Father was asking Him to do, even death and Hell, was ultimately the best and most desirable thing to do.   A "Though He slay me, still I will hope in Him" attitude...   Trust...  Hope...

"...fixing our eyes on Jesus, the author and perfecter of faith, who for the joy set before Him endured the cross, despising the shame, and has sat down at the right hand of the throne of God."

...and love.

a long ramble, probably not worth reading...  a dipping of the ladle into the frothing stew that is my mind of late...

I came across this fascinating article on "what the Bible says about humor" via a google search today.  It's something I've been wondering about for a while, and lately much more than usual.... looking for ways in which to grow in this area in my life.

Yet as the article mentions, Jesus and Paul and Peter and all the biblical folk seemed very serious.  Consider especially Jesus.  On the one hand, he was apparently VERY popular... invited often to dine, invited to weddings, etc.  His first miracle was to create wine for a wedding, of all things. He was known as a "friend of tax collectors and sinners", and His enemies called him "a glutton and a drunkard."

On the other hand, his recorded words seem extremely serious at all times - unceasingly challenging people about where they stood in relationship to God.  For example, Luke 9:43-44- "But while everyone was marveling at all that He was doing, He said to His disciples, "Let these words sink into your ears; for the Son of Man is going to be delivered into the hands of men."" or Luke 6 "Blessed are you who weep now, for you shall laugh. ...Woe to you who laugh now, for you shall mourn and weep."

Was Jesus ever sad?  Oh yes... He "began to be very distressed and troubled", He "wept", etc.  If one of us were to go around telling our friends all day that we were going to be persecuted and killed in the near future, our friends would probably consider us paranoid and improperly morbid.  But Jesus did this.

But on the other hand, Jesus never seemed truly "worried" about anything.  Everything was a matter of simple trust in His Father... that His Father would provide everything that was necessary at just the right time.  (Luke 11:1-13, Matt. 6:25-34, etc).   When the disciples were scared about visiting Jerusalem, Jesus calmly went right ahead, knowing that "His hour had not yet come".  The closest Jesus seemed to come to worrying (yet not even then) was the night before He knew He was going to be killed and to suffer the penalty of eternal death for our sins.

Obviously some people are more naturally humorous than others.  But to what extent ought we to seek to be fun people to be around, to laugh more for the sake of laughing more, to engage in 'widely-considered-fun' activities for the sake of connecting more with our (entertainment-focused) American culture...?   Or is that the wrong direction, and instead we ought to just focus on God and trusting Him more and delighting in Him more and reveling more in the salvation/glory He has promised us, and simply decide not to care whether other people think we are boring or not?

I.e. I've heard it said (quite prevalently in the mainstream American Christian culture), "we ought to be the happiest / most joyful people on earth" (with which I almost certainly agree, because of what God has done for us).  I've also heard it said, "let's show our non-Christian friends that we Christians know how to have fun; that we're not boring and unable to laugh" (with which I am not nearly as certain as to whether I agree...  because the Bible predicts that the world will "hate" us and "revile" us, and even that they will definitely think that we are boring and worse... 1 Peter 4:3-5).   Especially at this time in the American church, where what is 'fun and exciting' seems often to take precedence over what is 'true'.

A quote from the article above: "If we eliminate everything sexual, everything scatological, everything snide and hurtful, we eliminate much of what passes for humor nowadays."

True.  Yet what is left?  What is humor?  Isn't humor essentially an instinctual pleasure that arises when we see or hear something 'unexpected' (especially in someone else's life)?  I.e. a sudden 'reverse' from the way things are expected... whether neutral (common as in puns), unfortunate (very common), or fortunate (uncommon).  What is appropriate/good humor?  Is it something that should be sought in our lives (cf. Paul "I have become all things to all men, so that I might by all means save some," speaking of becoming like one 'under the law' or like one 'not under the law' depending on who he was with)?  Or is humor / funniness / fun-ness-to-be-around something NOT to be pursued, a byproduct of being delighted in God alone?    If it is the case that people in general do not find me enjoyable to be around, is this my fault or theirs, and how would I know?  And if (as is likely) there are some areas in which I need to change, how do I change??

I've also been thinking a bit about the sense of humor that God (the One True God, the God of the Bible, the Creator) exhibits.  What things make God laugh?   (Would God laugh at Monty Python's "Holy Grail"?)

It seems from my reading of scripture that the things that God enjoys are likewise "reversals", just like human humor.  But particularly, 'reversals' in which He Himself gets the glory and the honor, in the end.

(And as Jonathan Edwards and John Piper point out, it is not 'selfish' at all for God to seek His own glory... rather, it is the only proper goal for Him... if He were to seek to glorify anything other than Himself, it would be wrong/improper... but it just so happens that God in His love has graciously chosen to 'take along with Him' a group of us who have been undeservedly swept up in His grand masterpiece of creation, salvation, and glory...  so that when God 'seeks His own glory', (e.g. Isaiah 48:11), He is also seeking our greatest good in the process..)

So the things that make God laugh:

    Why are the nations in an uproar
And the peoples devising a vain thing?
The kings of the earth take their stand
And the rulers take counsel together
Against the LORD and against His Anointed, saying,
"Let us tear their fetters apart
And cast away their cords from us!"
He who sits in the heavens laughs,
The Lord scoffs at them. 
Then He will speak to them in His anger
And terrify them in His fury, saying,
"But as for Me, I have installed My King
Upon Zion, My holy mountain."  (Psalm 2:1-6)

...at the very thought of a puny group of humans thwarting God's omnipotent strength... Ha!  The idea of a group of 'powerful men' 'taking secret counsel together' (ooh, wow, someone's going to be in big trouble, I wonder who) against God, the Creator of the Universe?!?! (majorly unexpected subject... perfect humor reaction... )

Similarly:

   If you had responded to my rebuke, I would have poured out my heart to you and made my thoughts known to you.
But since you rejected me when I called and no one gave heed when I stretched out my hand, since you ignored all my advice and would not accept my rebuke, I in turn will laugh at your disaster; I will mock when calamity overtakes you - when calamity overtakes you like a storm, when disaster sweeps over you like a whirlwind, when distress and trouble overwhelm you.
Then they will call to me but I will not answer; they will look for me but will not find me. Since they hated knowledge and did not choose to fear the LORD, since they would not accept my advice and spurned my rebuke, they will eat the fruit of their ways and be filled with the fruit of their schemes. Proverbs 1.23ff

But He also says:

"Do I have any pleasure in the death of the wicked," declares the Lord GOD, "rather than that he should turn from his ways and live? ...
"Cast away from you all your transgressions which you have committed and make yourselves a new heart and a new spirit! For why will you die, O house of Israel?
"For I have no pleasure in the death of anyone who dies," declares the Lord GOD. "Therefore, repent and live." Ezekiel 18:23,31-32

This is God's own heart-longing, and simultaneously His sovereign decree - He would much rather that everyone would repent and return to Him and receive His free salvation that He purchased at His own terrible expense.  But when people reject and scorn His love and subsequently receive what they deserve (i.e. what we all deserve, but what some of us will not receive), when the tables are turned, when those who were once proud and arrogant and 'didn't need God' are at that time revealed for who they truly are and sent to their final deserved destination, when justice is finally fully served and God is revealed as the only truly Righteous One, the Beautiful One, etc, He will laugh.  Despite the pain and heartache involved in the romance and the courtship, the marriage of God and His Bride (us Christians) will be the ultimate 'happy ending'.   (and as Lewis says, it's really rather a beginning than an ending... the story beyond the title page...)

For more on this, check out Hannah's prayer, Mary's prayer, Zechariah's prayer, and so much more.  It seems like the whole Bible is streaked with this theme... that God chooses the "despised things of the world" (1 Cor 1-3) and raises them up to show His power/glory while allowing the 'great and mighty things of the world' to fall under their own inherent creaturely insufficiency. "After the last tear falls," there will be love, yes, but that's only half of the story.  There will be justice.  There will be retribution.  There will be rewards.  There will be fully-deserved Hell for most people, and tears for those people forever.  But there will be love and undeserved Heaven for those of us who have been adopted and ransomed by the Great True God.  "Many who are first will be last, and the last, first."

Back to the subject of fun, humor, and enjoyable/juicy life.  What makes you happy?  What makes me happy?  Is happiness dependent on circumstances?   Ought it to be?  Is my happiness dependent on others' perceptions of me?  I.e., would I be perfectly happy except that I have noticed that certain people consider me and my life boring and dry and arid, after which subsequently I find myself adopting their opinion and viewing my own life as boring and dry and arid?  (btw, my situation is not quite that bad, I'm just saying this for the discussion, though there is definitely some heat underneath the boiling stew pot of my mind).

What makes a fun life?   Some people would say, 'contentment'.   I.e. whatever you do, enjoy it, be content in it.  The secular world says this all the time, and there is a substantial amount of truth in it, imho.  E.g. "If life gives you lemons, make lemonade."  Good thought.  How much more applicable to those of us who have been adopted by God!  Because for us, there is no such thing as an ultimately "bad" thing ever happening to us again.  Every single thing that happens to one of us God's children has been carefully allowed/sent from God's loving hand to work something good in our lives.

But is "I know everything will work together for good" the same as "a fun life"?   Other people say, "hobbies" are what makes life fun.   Other people say, "friends".  Other people say, "marriage."  "Paintball."  "Golf."  "Chocolate."    "Serving other people."

I am of the opinion, of course, that 'contentment' is closer than these other things... at least for those of us who belong to God (those who are still enemies of God had better pay very close attention to the last vestiges of the "something's wrong here" feeling nagging at their hearts!)   I.e. if I (as a Christian) ever get the feeling that my life is 'not fun', I need to step back and take a careful look at who I am in Christ, and what I have to look forward to after death, and then take careful stock again of The Great Blessing and all the gazillions of temporal blessings He has given to me.  And then I must "choose to be content" / "choose to be happy" / "choose to delight myself in Him" regardless of my circumstances.   And then I can begin adding hobbies and pastimes and ministries and friendships, but always watchful/mindful to make sure I'm not relying on those things to fill me up and make me happy.

So that's the theory.  Is the theory correct?  Is the whole concept of "a fun life" an illusion that I have been suckered into by my society?  Let's say for the purpose of argument that the two main questions I am wrestling with are: "what personal activies/hobbies/(and even characteristics in friends that I choose) do I enjoy (as opposed to what other people enjoy, and I just think I enjoy because I am influenced by my peers)", and, "if I ever feel like life is empty or hollow, what is the appropriate remedy? A. seek to delight myself more in God, B. seek to fill up my life with more "fun activities", C. "both A and B" (but how can this be?!?!?!? how is it possible to 'serve two masters', to 'bear fruit for God' while simultaneously 'choking oneself with the cares and riches of this life'?), or, D. some other option that I am not aware of."

Let's say for the sake of argument that what I really need in my life is not more "humor" or more "funniness" or more "fun-life-activities/hobbies", but more satisfaction in God... such that I am content and brimming over with thankfulness and joy regardless of 'how my day is going' or 'what my peers are saying about me today'.   And let's also postulate that what I need specifically in my life is more love (and 'bolder love') for other people.  The two are linked of course - only if I am satisfied in God can I truly be free to love others.  Only if I am confident that His opinion of me is certain/unchanging/constant/overwhelmingly-intense agape-love, can I confidently reach out to others... secure in the fact that if my efforts 'fall flat' or are rejected, it really doesn't matter because I have Someone who loves me.

(In this sense I and everyone in the world is 'feminine' compared to God... in the love vs respect gradient... i.e. the stereotype is that men want respect/honor/esteem and women want love... and I have found the stereotype to be overwhelmingly accurate.  But compared to God, none of us can hope for His respect (except the angel's greeting to Daniel? and Is. 66:2?), we can only receive His love, and obey Him... )

But then let's say God does put more love in my heart for other people, such that I am just overflowing with love all the time toward others.  Wouldn't this be seen as "extremely uncool" in almost all areas of our society?  I.e. what my society values is "fun" and "scintillation", NOT "love" (i.e. Greek agape, unconditional sacrificial love).  And especially not in a man!!  The more I move in that direction, so it would seem, the more "wussified" (and maybe even "gay") I would seem to be viewed.  I.e. I would seem to be moving in the exact opposite of the direction that John Eldredge recommends followers of Christ move in today's society.  Of course John Eldredge might be wrong (and there are other leaders that advocate a much 'softer' and more feminized version of Christian manhood, with the emphasis on 'brokenness' rather than 'masculinity').  But the questions continue.  As a youth leader, I am to be an example to the young men in my care.  An example of Christlikeness, hopefully, not an example of American worldliness.  But what would Christ look like as a youth leader?  Would they say of Him, "Yeah!  My youth leader is Jesus!  He's so cool!  He's buff and athletic and extremely cool.  He has a rapier wit, and he's down with the latest music and movies.  When he throws a party, you definitely want to be there.  Jesus is the most happening person I know."   OR would they say,   "Um yeah, I'm stuck with Jesus as my youth leader. He's pretty much the most uncool person I know. Whenever I'm trying to talk about football or cars or hot girls or paintball, he's always in my face telling me that I need to 'repent of my sins' and 'love God with all my heart' or 'seek to enter the narrow gate.'  Whenever I used to ask him if he had heard an album or seen a movie, he would say, 'Do the images and dialog and plot of that movie help you to glorify God?'   I now try to avoid him whenever possible."

Yet if "overflowingness-with-love" is a character facet that pleases God, should I not pursue this with reckless abandon, given that God is far more important than any and all other people, and his opinion is far more important than "society's" opinion?

And yes, there is still a "main situation" prompting much of this questioning, occurring currently in my life, in which I admit that I would really really really appreciate your prayers for me, for wisdom... that I would walk wisely through this situation, that the situation would bring me closer to God, that I would behave in a way that I would not regret afterward, that I would be a good example to those who are watching my life, and chiefly that I would value and be-satisfied-in God as my highest and top goal/priority/love.  I am thankful to God for putting me in this spot, as it has prompted me to seek wisdom and to seek to understand myself better (and life itself in nomological ways).  But I really need His help to get me through.  Thanks to all of you for your prayer and support.

And thanks mostly to You, God.   You have given me eternal life with You, despite my immense sins and my inherent unworthiness.

 

I am shocked.   My location is creeping into my life and radically changing me.

Or at least my vocabulary.

Yesterday I used the following phrase for the first time ever, and didn't realize it until afterward:

"...needs worked on..."  instead of  "...needs to be worked on..."

AAAHHHH!!!!!

Oh well.

What to do when you really really want to get two groups of people to have some fun and fellowship together (because supposedly "all religions are essentially the same"), but somehow it just keeps falling apart?

 

Another fascinating news item from the grinding edge of the clash between Islam and Postmodern/Western/Liberal/Pseudoreligious Secularism.

 

The game was supposed to conclude the "Shoulder to Shoulder" multi-religous conference.

These cartoons, drawn just prior to the last global war, are just as appropriate today as when they were first made... though less politically correct today.  Terrorism and its state sponsors (such as Iran and Syria) and the forces behind the global Caliphate have replaced the Nazis.  Pelosi and Carter and crew have replaced Chamberlain.  Bush might be likened to Franklin D. Roosevelt in some ways.  Who will replace Winston Churchill and Harry S Truman?

Perhaps you'll be as surprised as I was to discover that the author of these cartoons was none other than dear Dr. Seuss.

 

"Granny was right" - Here's a scandalously old-fashioned (and rather amusing) secular perspective on marriage.

And on the same topic, here is a fascinating Muslim perspective, from none other than Iran President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad: "You will know that among the detainees there is one lady who is a mother of a child. Why is it that the most difficult work like patrolling at sea should be given to a woman? Why is there no respect for motherhood? Why does the West not value its women?"

Meanwhile the Bible still affirms the awesome and unique role of women and mothers... to those who will listen...

"...huge edifices of ideas such as positivism never really die. Thinking people gradually abandon them and even ridicule them among themselves, but keep the persuasively useful parts to scare away the uninformed."

John Angus Campbell, "The Comic Frame and the Rhetoric of Science: Epistemology and Ethics in Darwin's Origin," Rhetoric Society Quarterly 24, pp.2750 (1994).

 

Ha.  Yes indeed.

Case in point #1. 

(hat tip to http://www.lynr.blogspot.com/)

Here's some hilarious stuff from http://www.uncommondescent.com/evolution/uds-first-suck-up-to-darwin-contest/#comments , in honor of the 2009 bicentennial of Charles Darwin's birth and the sesquicentennial of his publication of "The Origin of Species".   Here are three of the 'odes'... the link has several more.   They're especially funny because they weave in a lot of real evolutionists' rhetoric, and expose some of the irony involved.  The second and third one especially bring out the problems atheism/naturalism/evolutionism has with reductionism and determinism... i.e. whether consciousness, morality, and free will are merely illusions or not.

 

 

Darwin lived in age of superstition and squalor yet rose above it to lead humanity into sunlight, into the promised land.

Darwin was abandoned by his mother at the age of three months after the insane King George III ordered the death of all infants named “Charles”, “Chas” or “Chuck”. The King’s daughter saw him floating in a basket amongst the bullrushes, however. His superior persona was obvious even at that age and she adopted him as her own.

Darwin grew into a comely man of great height and uncommon strength. He was known to be able to carry a full-grown cow upon his shoulders. Many respected accounts have him running a four-minute mile over a century before Roger Bannister. And in boots.

Still it is the prowness of his mind, not his body for which he is known.

Science was in a primative and unenlighted state before his birth. There was no telephone, eletric light, or aeroplane.

There was no motor car. Not a single luxury.

Darwin’s then theorized that whales might have descended from bears - swimming bears, that is — and all these things became possible.

The glories of the 20th Century would not have occurred without Charles, Chas, Chuck, Darwin.

Much has been written about Darwin, and much more will be.

It can never be enough.

He was a real man of genius. Charles Darwin, we salute you!

As we approach 200 years since Darwin’s birth, how can we go about gauging his importance to the world? When looking at the role of individuals in history, it can be easy to forget that history moves dialectically. Ideas are not the result of individuals, but material, historical processes. If Darwin had chosen a different profession in his youth, the idea of Evolution would have still emerged as a great force in the world.

Does this mean that we shouldn’t honor and revere Darwin? Absolutely not. Material reality chose Darwin to reveal the truth of evolution. By honoring Darwin, we honor the ultimate material reality. Conveniently, Evolution also molded man so that he needed heroes to look up to. Evolution, amazingly, built in a mechanism by which the idea of Evolution can spread. We can honor Darwin by celebrating him and reading his work. In doing so, we fulfill two important Evolutionary needs: the need for a hero and the need for truth about reality. Truth about reality, of course, helps humans advance as a species. Darwin’s work, by undoing the misguided superstitions that evolved for thousands of years, has done more to help us advance as a species than any other man in modern times

Listen my child and I shall tell you
Of the Prophet and His mighty works

The story begins eons ago,
Indeed in the very beginning

For in the beginning were the particles
And, lo, the particles were in motion

Eons passed
Galaxies formed
stars were born; burned for billions of years and died

And in all this time, the particles knew naught
Of themselves or anything else
There was no knowing, my child, for what can particles in motion know?

But slowly, ever so slowly, some of the burned out star stuff
Began to coalesce around a core and form a small planet

Further eons passed and still there was nothing but particles in motion
That knew nothing, for what can particles in motion know?

But then one day, in a warm pond on this little planet
Some of the particles received a surge of energy and
Formed self-replicating groups of bio particles

But still, the particles knew nothing; for what can particles in motion know?

Further eons passed.

And then, oh day of days, came a descendant
Of that first group of self replicating bio particles from that warm pond
And he looked to the heavens and declared “I know.”

This great and glorious amalgamation of bio particles we call the Prophet
Others call him Darwin.

But alas, Darwin did not really know, as he himself recognized
For what can particles in motion know?

I would call you “best beloved” but we know
That love is not real; it is just a chemical reaction in our brain.

So, I shall say, “one who is the object of
The illusory but nevertheless pleasurable chemical reaction in my brain
That I choose (alas, another illusion) to call love”
That is how we came to know that we do not know
For what can particles in motion know?

"Europe split over best way to mark 50 years of unity"...